has been proven to be wrong能不能改成.Gul said the claims are "preposterous" and "totally false," and cautioned that the CIA has been proven to be wrong about intelligence in the past.能不能改成“CIA has proven wrong about intelligence in
来源:学生作业帮助网 编辑:六六作业网 时间:2024/12/26 14:43:20
has been proven to be wrong能不能改成.Gul said the claims are "preposterous" and "totally false," and cautioned that the CIA has been proven to be wrong about intelligence in the past.能不能改成“CIA has proven wrong about intelligence in
has been proven to be wrong能不能改成.
Gul said the claims are "preposterous" and "totally false," and cautioned that the CIA has been proven to be wrong about intelligence in the past.
能不能改成“CIA has proven wrong about intelligence in the past”?
prove直接有“证明是”的意思,比如:The search proved difficult.
回复Sunshine____:请参考一下这些帖子:
有人说prove根本不能用被动。而且prove既然是系动词后面为什么不直接跟名词,还要to be?
----------------
回复Sunshine____:
问题就是这个例子中为什么就不能是系表结构?因为是完成时吗?He has been my teacher for two years不也是系表结构的完成时吗?
呵呵,再看看还有人回答没,要是例子再多些可能就能总结出规律了。
has been proven to be wrong能不能改成.Gul said the claims are "preposterous" and "totally false," and cautioned that the CIA has been proven to be wrong about intelligence in the past.能不能改成“CIA has proven wrong about intelligence in
不能,因为当prove做系动词时,可用主动形式表被动意义,
即翻译为"证明是"
而当prove做实义动词时,即翻译为"证明"
在此句中,prove 是实义动词,
所以只能用被动形式表被动意义.
回答楼主.
我是说在此句"the CIA has been proven to be wrong"中 prove是做实义动词,并不是系动词,
而在楼主的例子The search proved difficult.中
prove 后接形容词,所以prove是做系动词.
即翻译为 证明是 , 即用主动形式表被动意义,
就是那些帖子中所说的prove没有被动.
回复楼主.
啊啊啊,抓狂啦.
楼主肯定是个很爱学习的人呐.
这样一问,
我也不知道啦啦啦.
感觉楼主说的没有错~~~
不好意思啦,
可能是我说错啦把~~~
回复.
赫赫,我觉得这个问题应该比较简单,
只是我们没有掌握好这个知识点而已,
希望有个最佳答案噢.
楼主是学生把?~~~
应该是个好学生也.
谁能解答啊。。。。
我就觉得has been proven to be difficult读着顺口些= =
has 是已经的意思 been是被动
The search proved difficult search不能自己证明
它需要被证明 所以是被动 如果已经被证明了
就需要加has了